Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorPrinciple Questions

A university research consortium recently terminated its collaborative genomics agreement with a private pharmaceutical firm after the firm filed for exclusive patents on diagnostic biomarkers discovered through the shared repository. Although the founding charter permitted commercial partners to patent downstream therapeutic interventions developed independently, consortium ethicists argued that the university was morally obligated to rescind the partnership because patenting the basic diagnostic sequences themselves directly impedes subsequent noncommercial public health research by other institutions.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the ethicists' reasoning?

  1. A
    An academic institution is justified in maintaining a partnership with a commercial enterprise only if that enterprise refrains from asserting exclusive rights over any downstream products developed from joint initiatives.
  2. B
    Research universities are morally required to prohibit commercial partners from seeking patent protection whenever an academic collaboration fails to produce independent therapeutic applications.
  3. An academic institution is morally obligated to terminate a collaborative research agreement if a commercial partner asserts exclusive intellectual property claims over shared discoveries in a manner that impedes noncommercial public health research.Cevap
  4. D
    Commercial partners in academic ventures must never be allowed to patent any scientific discovery unless every member institution of the consortium unanimously consents in writing.
  5. E
    An academic institution is obligated to terminate a joint research partnership only when a partner entity directly breaches the explicit contractual terms of the governing charter.

Cevap

An academic institution is morally obligated to terminate a collaborative research agreement if a commercial partner asserts exclusive intellectual property claims over shared discoveries in a manner that impedes noncommercial public health research.
The ethicists conclude that the university had a moral duty to rescind its collaborative agreement because the pharmaceutical firm's patenting of shared biomarkers obstructed noncommercial public health research. The correct principle provides the exact sufficient rule required: whenever a private partner asserts exclusive rights over shared discoveries in a way that hinders noncommercial public health research, an academic institution is morally obligated to terminate the collaboration.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Isolate the premises and the normative conclusion in the stimulus.
Premise: The private firm patented basic diagnostic biomarkers discovered via a shared repository, which directly impedes noncommercial public health research by other institutions. Conclusion: The university was morally obligated to rescind the partnership.
Justifying an argument requires identifying the logical leap between empirical facts and an ethical judgment.
2
Determine the structural requirement of a principle that justifies the conclusion.
The principle must establish a sufficient condition: [Commercial partner claims IP over shared discoveries that obstructs noncommercial research] → [Academic institution is morally obligated to terminate the agreement].
A sufficient condition guarantees that the occurrence of the premise triggers the stated moral obligation.
3
Match the required conditional bridge to the options.
The option asserting an obligation to terminate when a partner asserts IP claims over shared discoveries that impede noncommercial public health research precisely bridges the gap.
It matches both the specific antecedent circumstances and the normative consequence without overreaching or reversing the logic.

Anahtar Kavram

Sufficient normative principles bridging factual premises to ethical conclusions
Tahmini Süre:1m 45s
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Principle Questions

Bu konudan daha fazla soru